472:. The Court held that the Virginia moratorium on uranium mining was not preempted by the federal Atomic Energy Act. Gorsuch's opinion emphasized that the plain language of the Atomic Energy Act was that it regulated activity only after the uranium was removed from the earth, leaving regulation of mining activity to the states. Gorsuch also rejected the approach of examining the state legislature's purpose for enacting the ban, stating that such an inquiry would generate unnecessary inconsistencies and intrude on the state legislature's ability to have a free and open debate.
31:
341:
When uranium prices rose in the early 2000s, VUI renewed its efforts to develop the mine. Though VUI claimed that its proposed mining site would have generated up to $ 4.8 billion in net revenue for
Virginia businesses, environmental groups criticized the plans, noting that uranium mining contributed
428:
of the
Western District granted Virginia's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, ruling in part that the Atomic Energy Act did not conflict with Virginia's ban on uranium mining. Though the District Court acknowledged that prior Supreme Court precedent required states to have a non-safety
399:
VUI's argument is that
Virginia's ban on mining was in fact motivated by health and safety concerns related to milling ore and storing the waste. Though VUI conceded that the state had the authority to regulate mining, they argued that the Virginia General Assembly's improper motivation for passing
306:
This case is significant because of its strong impact on environmentalism as well as its discussion of the interplay between states' rights and federal supremacy. It also featured an extensive discussion as to what extent courts should evaluate a legislature's motive for passing a law.
429:
rationale to regulate activities that were within the NRC's purview, it also determined that first phase of uranium development (mining) was not covered by the AEA. It also held that the
District Court would not delve into the motivations of the state in passing the law.
330:, who are now the founders and owners of Virginia Uranium, Incorporated. Though VUI owned the land containing the proposed uranium mine, it could not extract the uranium due to a 1982 state ban on uranium mining. Virginia enacted this law after the notorious
487:, wrote a separate opinion concurring with Gorsuch's final judgment. However, they did not join the part of Gorsuch's opinion which discussed role of inquiring into the state legislature's purpose, which they viewed as falling outside the scope of the case.
346:
rates, acidification of waterways, and air pollution. Local businesses also criticized the proposed uranium mining project, citing potential harm to agriculture, tourism, and other economic development opportunities. VUI lobbied the
502:. Roberts asserted that the majority failed to reckon with whether a state could indirectly regulate a preempted activity (such as the milling and storage of uranium) by regulating a non-preempted activity (such as mining).
421:
556:
909:
292:
929:
326:
deposits in the United States and the seventh largest uranium deposit in the world. The site's main uranium lode was discovered in 1979 on private land owned by the descendants of
529:
433:
79:
616:
436:
in 2016. In 2017, the Fourth
Circuit upheld the District Court's determination. VUI appealed again, this time to the United States Supreme Court, which granted a
924:
919:
352:
274:
949:
904:
587:
384:
confers the responsibility for regulating the second and third steps of the process (milling ore to create yellowcake and storing the tailings) to the
899:
372:
Broadly speaking, the development of uranium is a three step process: physically mining the uranium from the ground; milling the ore to produce
954:
944:
385:
676:
557:"Opinion analysis: Virginia's moratorium on uranium mining is not pre-empted, but the role of legislative purpose remains open for debate"
934:
914:
288:
35:
393:
645:
706:
389:
939:
740:
409:
331:
381:
348:
300:
270:
335:
98:
63:
369:
and his vow to veto any effort to lift the uranium ban, VUI decided to pursue a judicial remedy instead.
533:
74:
617:"Argument analysis: Justices express skepticism over using legislative motive in pre-emption analysis"
396:). Regulating the first step (mining of ore) has traditionally been left up to the state governments.
363:
315:
827:
476:
319:
191:
444:, founder of the law firm Cooper & Kirk, PLLC, argued the case on behalf of Virginia Uranium.
460:
On June 17, 2019, the
Supreme Court ruled in favor of Virginia and upheld the state ban. Justice
437:
401:
359:
sponsored a bill that would have created a licensing scheme for issuing uranium permits in 2013.
881:
449:
441:
425:
405:
863:
525:
480:
469:
465:
445:
366:
227:
207:
183:
495:
356:
195:
893:
588:"Virginia's uranium mining battle flips traditional views of federal and state power"
773:
121:
795:
499:
491:
461:
327:
219:
203:
175:
139:
484:
215:
118:
464:
announced the judgment of the Court and authored an opinion joined by
Justices
373:
160:
The Atomic Energy Act does not preempt
Virginia's moratorium on uranium mining
147:
86:
872:
799:
777:
377:
296:
143:
125:
323:
343:
136:
30:
452:
of
Virginia, represented the state before the Supreme Court.
376:(urania); and safely securing the waste material (known as '
677:"Virginia uranium-mining ban upheld by US Supreme Court"
295:. In a split opinion, the Court held that the state of
910:
United States
Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
434:
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
54:
Virginia Uranium Inc., et al., v. John Warren, et al.
741:"High Court to Probe Virginia Ban on Uranium Mining"
440:
agreeing to hear the case on May 21, 2018. Attorney
299:'s ban on uranium mining did not conflict with the
264:
256:
248:
240:
235:
164:
154:
109:
104:
94:
69:
59:
49:
42:
23:
610:
608:
252:Ginsburg (in judgment), joined by Sotomayor, Kagan
550:
548:
546:
544:
542:
930:United States statutory interpretation case law
581:
579:
577:
646:"Uranium Mining Might Start in Virginia Soon"
8:
322:is the location of one of the largest known
670:
668:
666:
701:
699:
697:
20:
816:, 138 S. Ct. 2023 (2018).
404:by the federal Atomic Energy Act and the
859:, 587 U.S. ___ (2019) is available from:
517:
515:
511:
479:, writing for herself and for Justices
763:
761:
707:"Virginia's uranium mining ban upheld"
639:
637:
386:United States Atomic Energy Commission
275:United States Constitution, Article VI
734:
732:
730:
728:
18:2019 United States Supreme Court case
7:
925:United States federal preemption law
920:United States environmental case law
244:Gorsuch, joined by Thomas, Kavanaugh
950:Uranium mining in the United States
769:Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. McAuliffe
615:Hammond, Emily (November 6, 2018).
362:However, following the election of
115:Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. McAuliffe
432:VUI appealed this decision to the
422:Western District Court of Virginia
351:to loosen the ban. State Senators
150:. granted, 138 S. Ct. 2023 (2018).
36:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
905:United States Supreme Court cases
739:Leonard, Barbara (May 21, 2018).
394:Energy Reorganization Act of 1974
857:Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren
813:Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren
791:Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren
644:Ward, Terry (October 10, 2015).
586:Jaffe, Cale (January 11, 2019).
555:Hammond, Emily (June 17, 2019).
522:Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren
400:the law meant that it should be
284:Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren
260:Roberts, joined by Breyer, Alito
133:Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren
29:
420:VUI first took its case to the
24:Virginia Uranium, Inc v. Warren
900:2019 in United States case law
494:dissented, joined by Justices
1:
955:Nuclear Regulatory Commission
945:Pittsylvania County, Virginia
675:Stohr, Greg (June 17, 2019).
390:Nuclear Regulatory Commission
287:, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a
882:Supreme Court (slip opinion)
828:"Justices grant 4 new cases"
536:___, 139 S. Ct. 1894 (2019).
774:147 F. Supp. 3d 462
289:United States Supreme Court
113:Motion to dismiss granted,
971:
873:Oyez (oral argument audio)
826:Howe, Amy (May 21, 2018).
410:United States Constitution
332:Three Mile Island disaster
935:Legal history of Virginia
915:Supremacy Clause case law
711:Arkansas Democrat Gazette
382:Atomic Energy Act of 1954
349:Virginia General Assembly
271:Atomic Energy Act of 1954
269:
169:
159:
28:
424:in November 2015. Judge
336:Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
745:Courthouse News Service
43:Argued November 5, 2018
456:Supreme Court opinion
85:139 S. Ct. 1894; 204
45:Decided June 17, 2019
796:848 F.3d 590
392:(NRC) following the
316:Coles Hill, Virginia
99:Opinion announcement
95:Opinion announcement
477:Ruth Bader Ginsburg
320:Pittsylvania County
192:Ruth Bader Ginsburg
940:Mining in Virginia
438:writ of certiorari
180:Associate Justices
450:Solicitor General
442:Charles J. Cooper
364:Virginia Governor
301:Atomic Energy Act
293:October 2018 term
280:
279:
962:
886:
880:
877:
871:
868:
862:
843:
842:
840:
838:
823:
817:
815:
809:
803:
793:
787:
781:
771:
765:
756:
755:
753:
751:
736:
723:
722:
720:
718:
703:
692:
691:
689:
687:
672:
661:
660:
658:
656:
641:
632:
631:
629:
627:
612:
603:
602:
600:
598:
592:The Conversation
583:
572:
571:
569:
567:
552:
537:
519:
426:Jackson L. Kiser
406:Supremacy Clause
380:'). The federal
165:Court membership
128:2015); affirmed
33:
32:
21:
970:
969:
965:
964:
963:
961:
960:
959:
890:
889:
884:
878:
875:
869:
866:
860:
852:
847:
846:
836:
834:
825:
824:
820:
811:
810:
806:
789:
788:
784:
767:
766:
759:
749:
747:
738:
737:
726:
716:
714:
713:. June 18, 2019
705:
704:
695:
685:
683:
674:
673:
664:
654:
652:
643:
642:
635:
625:
623:
614:
613:
606:
596:
594:
585:
584:
575:
565:
563:
554:
553:
540:
520:
513:
508:
481:Sonia Sotomayor
470:Brett Kavanaugh
466:Clarence Thomas
458:
446:Toby J. Heytens
418:
416:In lower courts
367:Terry McAuliffe
313:
228:Brett Kavanaugh
218:
208:Sonia Sotomayor
206:
194:
184:Clarence Thomas
90:
44:
38:
19:
12:
11:
5:
968:
966:
958:
957:
952:
947:
942:
937:
932:
927:
922:
917:
912:
907:
902:
892:
891:
888:
887:
851:
850:External links
848:
845:
844:
818:
804:
782:
757:
724:
693:
681:Bloomberg News
662:
633:
604:
573:
538:
510:
509:
507:
504:
496:Stephen Breyer
490:Chief Justice
457:
454:
417:
414:
357:Richard Saslaw
312:
309:
291:case from the
278:
277:
267:
266:
262:
261:
258:
254:
253:
250:
246:
245:
242:
238:
237:
233:
232:
231:
230:
196:Stephen Breyer
181:
178:
173:
167:
166:
162:
161:
157:
156:
152:
151:
111:
107:
106:
102:
101:
96:
92:
91:
84:
71:
67:
66:
61:
57:
56:
51:
50:Full case name
47:
46:
40:
39:
34:
26:
25:
17:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
967:
956:
953:
951:
948:
946:
943:
941:
938:
936:
933:
931:
928:
926:
923:
921:
918:
916:
913:
911:
908:
906:
903:
901:
898:
897:
895:
883:
874:
865:
858:
854:
853:
849:
833:
829:
822:
819:
814:
808:
805:
801:
797:
792:
786:
783:
779:
775:
770:
764:
762:
758:
746:
742:
735:
733:
731:
729:
725:
712:
708:
702:
700:
698:
694:
682:
678:
671:
669:
667:
663:
651:
647:
640:
638:
634:
622:
618:
611:
609:
605:
593:
589:
582:
580:
578:
574:
562:
558:
551:
549:
547:
545:
543:
539:
535:
531:
527:
523:
518:
516:
512:
505:
503:
501:
497:
493:
488:
486:
482:
478:
473:
471:
467:
463:
455:
453:
451:
447:
443:
439:
435:
430:
427:
423:
415:
413:
411:
407:
403:
397:
395:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
370:
368:
365:
360:
358:
354:
350:
345:
342:to increased
339:
337:
333:
329:
325:
321:
317:
310:
308:
304:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
285:
276:
272:
268:
263:
259:
255:
251:
247:
243:
239:
236:Case opinions
234:
229:
225:
221:
217:
213:
209:
205:
201:
197:
193:
189:
185:
182:
179:
177:
174:
172:Chief Justice
171:
170:
168:
163:
158:
153:
149:
145:
141:
138:
134:
131:
127:
123:
120:
116:
112:
108:
103:
100:
97:
93:
88:
82:
81:
76:
72:
68:
65:
62:
58:
55:
52:
48:
41:
37:
27:
22:
16:
856:
837:November 27,
835:. Retrieved
831:
821:
812:
807:
790:
785:
768:
750:November 27,
748:. Retrieved
744:
717:November 27,
715:. Retrieved
710:
686:November 26,
684:. Retrieved
680:
655:November 27,
653:. Retrieved
649:
626:November 26,
624:. Retrieved
620:
597:November 27,
595:. Retrieved
591:
566:November 26,
564:. Retrieved
560:
521:
500:Samuel Alito
492:John Roberts
489:
474:
462:Neil Gorsuch
459:
431:
419:
398:
371:
361:
353:John Watkins
340:
328:Walter Coles
314:
305:
283:
282:
281:
265:Laws applied
223:
220:Neil Gorsuch
211:
204:Samuel Alito
199:
187:
176:John Roberts
132:
129:
114:
105:Case history
78:
53:
15:
802: 2017).
780: 2015).
485:Elena Kagan
249:Concurrence
216:Elena Kagan
119:F. Supp. 3d
894:Categories
832:SCOTUSBlog
621:SCOTUSBlog
561:SCOTUSBlog
524:, No.
506:References
374:yellowcake
311:Background
60:Docket no.
402:preempted
388:(now the
241:Plurality
87:L. Ed. 2d
70:Citations
855:Text of
800:4th Cir.
778:W.D. Va.
475:Justice
378:tailings
297:Virginia
144:4th Cir.
130:sub nom.
126:W.D. Va.
526:16-1275
408:of the
324:uranium
257:Dissent
155:Holding
146:2017);
64:16-1275
885:
879:
876:
870:
867:
864:Justia
861:
798: (
794:,
776: (
772:,
528:,
448:, the
344:cancer
226:
224:·
222:
214:
212:·
210:
202:
200:·
198:
190:
188:·
186:
135:, 848
117:, 147
532:
318:, in
110:Prior
839:2019
752:2019
719:2019
688:2019
657:2019
650:WHSV
628:2019
599:2019
568:2019
534:U.S.
498:and
483:and
468:and
355:and
148:cert
137:F.3d
80:more
75:U.S.
73:587
530:587
334:in
140:590
122:462
89:377
896::
830:.
760:^
743:.
727:^
709:.
696:^
679:.
665:^
648:.
636:^
619:.
607:^
590:.
576:^
559:.
541:^
514:^
412:.
338:.
303:.
273:,
841:.
754:.
721:.
690:.
659:.
630:.
601:.
570:.
142:(
124:(
83:)
77:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.